|
Many people seem confused here. When you criticize a designer for a product, you are criticizing them professionally not personally. You don't have to meet a person to know that you think their book was junk.But it's simple. If you think the book is junk say "the book is junk". Don't say "he's a lousy designer". Stay on topic. In the end, it's not about the people, it's about the product.
Moderation can be useful but is inversely related to the health of the exchange.Only if you think your posts will get moderated. I don't worry about it so much, but then, I don't want to offend, so I always try to choose my words as best as I can. (I usually re-read my posts 3 or 4 times before posting, for example.)
Greg
When an author writes a work, they hold themselves up to public scrutiny and criticism. When someone says they are a lousy author, it is a criticism of them professionally. that is on topic, especially if you are referring to a lack of quality carried between several books. Unfortunately, I cannot see the logic in your line of reasoning. To me it smacks of trying to be overly concerned with not hurting someones feelings. Once again, criticism is the price you pay for a public career like writing or film making.
As for the moderation bit, if you have the time to reread your posts 3 or 4 times before submitting, that's great. I envy you that amount of time, because I have barely enough to get online an hour or so a night. (note: my posting spree of yesterday & today is due to me being home ill) There should be no need to overly analyze a post to that degree.
Anyway, that's my stance on things. While not as pleasant as yours, I think it equally valid.
Have a good un,
The 'Ling
Under certain circumstances, profanity provides a relief denied even to prayer. --Mark Twain
|
I'm confused.
We've asked folks to be civil in 1/38th of our messageboard and people are fleeing for the hills? After we asked nicely for folks to be civil, they continued to be less-than-civil, so we cleaned up 1/38th of our messageboard and asked everyone to please rethink their approach to lacking civility in that 1/38th of our messageboard. Yes, that means light moderation. On 1/38th of our messageboard.
I'm sorry to see everyone go. I'm also sticking by the fact that if you can't talk about 4E without personally attacking other members or insulting other companies in the industry, then this probably isn't your board.
Lots of people waving their hands in the air.
Just because some guy posted that this particular subforum was nastier than ENWorld or the Wizards boards (which, as someone who visits all three daily, seems patently false to me. Ask an innocent question for a rules interpretation on the ENWorld boards and watch how many people jump down your throat and call you an idiot or munchkin and invoking SRD / CustServ / RAW...).
It's an awful tiny teapot for such a big tempest, IMO. And, all too often, the people who complain most about the 'toxic atmosphere' seem to be one of two camps, A) the worst name-callers out there, who've been calling people haters and fanatics and irrational for months, B) people who don't frequent these boards anyway, and just read how anti-4E Paizo was over on another board and decided to do a drive-by trolling.
|
Sorry, I misspoke. My point was that the "health of the exchange" results from unclear language. If you are worried that your posts are worded such that you may get moderated, chances are you are not speaking clearly enough. The rules are clear - don't insult people. If you are not trying to insult but are worried that you may get moderated, try improving your language.
Most post was about one's fears, not about one's guilt.
Two completely different things.
Greg
I see your point (to a degree - I am probably talking with you in the part where we might disagree in another thread).
Thanks for the clarification.
|
|
Lots of people waving their hands in the air.
Just because some guy posted that this particular subforum was nastier than ENWorld or the Wizards boards (which, as someone who visits all three daily, seems patently false to me. Ask an innocent question for a rules interpretation on the ENWorld boards and watch how many people jump down your throat and call you an idiot or munchkin and invoking SRD / CustServ / RAW...).
It's an awful tiny teapot for such a big tempest, IMO. And, all too often, the people who complain most about the 'toxic atmosphere' seem to be one of two camps, A) the worst name-callers out there, who've been calling people haters and fanatics and irrational for months, B) people who don't frequent these boards anyway, and just read how anti-4E Paizo was over on another board and decided to do a drive-by trolling.
Ding! Ding! Ding! We have a winner! :)
Well put, Set. But the effects of this tempest, tiny teapot or no, have been significant.
When an author writes a work, they hold themselves up to public scrutiny and criticism. When someone says they are a lousy author, it is a criticism of them professionally. that is on topic, especially if you are referring to a lack of quality carried between several books. Unfortunately, I cannot see the logic in your line of reasoning. To me it smacks of trying to be overly concerned with not hurting someones feelings. Once again, criticism is the price you pay for a public career like writing or film making.
Fair enough. I see your point. Perhaps the vitriol I've seen has made me swing a little too far in the other direction.
But in truth, Erik, Joshua, Lisa, et al have asked repeated and politely that we not insult anyone at WotC, and yet it's still done. It is their sandbox, after all.
As for the moderation bit, if you have the time to reread your posts 3 or 4 times before submitting, that's great. I envy you that amount of time, because I have barely enough to get online an hour or so a night. (note: my posting spree of yesterday & today is due to me being home ill) There should be no need to overly analyze a post to that degree.
Well, that's a personal preference. I'd rather post 3 or 4 times a week, and make sure I say exactly what I mean, rather than rush a post and be mis-understood. (And yet it seems to already have happened, for all the good it does me.)
[edit: ok, its more like 3 or 4 posts, 3 or 4 times a week - but I'm still pretty low on the totem pole here :)]
Anyway, that's my stance on things. While not as pleasant as yours, I think it equally valid.
Have a good un,
You too.
Greg
|
I feel sad about all this!
I can only hope that people I learned to listen to, like FakeHealer, F2K, GGG, Disenchanter, and many more, stay here and just ignore posts or threads about this 4E debate or other flamable stuff.
We are old enough, and (hopefully) wise enought to not let us be chased away, because some people try to break down "our" messageboards (which Paizo so generously gave us for free). We are the one's who have the power (and maybe responsibility) to get "our" boards back.
I totally stopped reading WotC-boards after discovering these here. Not because I hate WotC (I don't hate them), but because I did not like some of the stuff special posters wrote over there.
The boards here are a totally different thing, and we should not go down without a fight in these hard times!
Lords of the boards, gather once more and SAY NO TO FLAMING, PERSONAL INSULTS AND CHILDISH BEHAVIOUR!
These are our boards and Lisa and Staff are doing a great job in listening to us. I hope we don't need them to make rules for us being and posting here. Let us show this great company that we can manage ourselves, no matter what Game, or what Edition we play!
Where else on this damn ball in space do we have a company which "talks" to us and "cares" for us.
Even if it's hard (I know it is), just resist the urge to post a response to some unqualified comments about designers, editions or other players! Ignore them and they'll lose interest!
Under certain circumstances, profanity provides a relief denied even to prayer. --Mark Twain
Absolutely. But the wisdom is in understanding the nature of those "certain circumstances".
Greg
Absolutely. But the wisdom is in understanding the nature of those "certain circumstances".
Whose wisdom shall we apply? Yours?
With all due respect, the only difference between the first set of examples and the second is the use of swear words, which are already filtered here if I'm not mistaken.When you're enforcing the line, it's pretty clear in your mind. Those of us on the receiving end can't see your line, and so it's confusing to us.
If someone where to say that "Designers X, Y and Z are lousy designers because of [cogent reasons a, b, c]", is that a personal attack or a reasonable argument? I bet even the Paizo staff couldn't agree on the answer.
I'm quoting Krypter here primarily because he (and lich-loved before him) has pointed out one of the fears some of us have, that strange queasy feeling we're getting about the atmosphere on the boards....
I trust Gary and his decisions, having read many of his posts in the past he strikes me as a likable, hard-working (and then some!!), decent kind of bloke. Of course he might eat babies in his spare time; evaluating someone based on message-board posts is an inexact science ;-)
And I'm sure Mr. Frost is likewise a decent person (even if he is in marketing and he may have been forced to sell his decency when he got his degree ;-) but he has certainly posted a few items here and there that I have felt were snarky and overly harsh (including carrying out the ignominious exectution of Vomit Guy for example :) :)
So what? Well, I'm sure we know what over-the-line means to Gary and Josh....hell, I'm sure with very little effort we can all find posts that have done it (and be reasonably sure of the identity of the poster to boot...). Anyone with half a sense of decency recognizes when they've been a complete arse to another human being/corporation.
We also know what completely polite, logical criticism that doesn't insult anyone looks like (I hope).
The problem is in the middle ground where some of us (and I don't want to put words in anyone's mouth here) might feel that we're wandering dangerously close to the wonderful world of Potter Stewart's definition of Pornography.
It has the unfortunate effect of dampening passion and shoot-from-the-hip honesty. Now am I saying that you can't be passionate unless you've called a designer a horse's arse? Please....
What I am saying is that rather than keeping the fire and the "realness" of a post, you end up navel-gazing, wondering whether you've somehow insulted someone (for example, one might assume that Josh will take a crack about his profession in stride, but what if he's had an off day? ;-) Once again, I really hate the insulting behaviour I've seen off and on, but I don't want to sacrifice the heat and genuine outrage over some of the changes coming down the pike at the same time as we try to excise the venomous crap that can poison a board.
But I'm not sure I've ever seen Disenchanter insult someone....I KNOW I've seen him fire away with a straight-shooting, no-bull kind of approach, that has never been disrespectful but which some people might find "offensive" because it's in your face a bit. So I know why he feels uncomfortable with these changes, and why for him (and to a lesser degree myself) this changes the equation of these boards.
And yes, it's only a small fraction of the boards....can anyone promise that this wouldn't happen on any other sub-forum if too many dumb buggers began posting bile rather than helpful advice/criticism? Of course not (and I wouldn't expect you to!)
I seem to be babbling a bit here.....
I just don't want this to end up like EN World where you can be as snide and passive-aggressive as you want, and come so very cloooooooooose to the edge of being rude without actually doing it (REPEATEDLY) but no-one calls you on it because you didn't actually come out and say that somebody's mother was a whore, you just ever so subtly intimated it.
And I don't feel entirely comfortable relying on someone else's definition of when something stops being angry criticism and starts being insulting/rudeness. To reiterate, we all know what eggregiously rude looks like, and we all know what polite, cogent posts look like, but the middle ground is where the slippery slope is.
So, I'm not leaving as some are (I respect too many of the designers/writers/staff in general here, and I love the products) but I understand why they are, and I'll be keeping an eye on things to see if the good vibe I used to get returns as we get through the next few days.
In the meanwhile, keep up the goodwork eh!
Cheers,
Colin
Absolutely. But the wisdom is in understanding the nature of those "certain circumstances".Whose wisdom shall we apply? Yours?
Oh, fer cryin' out loud, are you looking for a fight? I was agreeing with you. No, I don't mean "my" wisdom. I have my own wisdom (as good or bad as it is) and I use it as best I can. But wisdom is generally learned, is it not?
Fer example. If a cop pulls you over for speeding, do you swear at him? My guess it that most people have learned, either through their own, or someone else'e experience, that this is a bad thing.
Greg
Absolutely. But the wisdom is in understanding the nature of those "certain circumstances".Whose wisdom shall we apply? Yours?
The owner of the arena where the communication is taking place. Profanity may have it's place (Lord knows I believe that), but it's hardly a staple of civil discourse. When it comes to not being able to direct profanity at each other on a company's message board, I think freedom can take the hit.
|
|
Lords of the boards, gather once more and SAY NO TO FLAMING, PERSONAL INSULTS AND CHILDISH BEHAVIOUR!
[joke] I find your statement to be exclusionary to those of us who are of common birth and not 'lords,' and also to children! I am highly offended by this personal insult! I demand pie* in recompense! [/joke]
*Mincemeat, Pumpkin or Apple are acceptable, but, in the case of Apple, there must also be vanilla ice-cream. No substitutions or exchanges, please.
And I'm sure Mr. Frost is likewise a decent person (even if he is in marketing and he may have been forced to sell his decency when he got his degree ;-) ...
Good thing I majored in English.
|
|
Lords of the boards, gather once more and SAY NO TO FLAMING, PERSONAL INSULTS AND CHILDISH BEHAVIOUR![joke] I find your statement to be exclusionary to those of us who are of common birth and not 'lords,' and also to children! I am highly offended by this personal insult! I demand pie* in recompense! [/joke]
*Mincemeat, Pumpkin or Apple are acceptable, but, in the case of Apple, there must also be vanilla ice-cream. No substitutions or exchanges, please.
You know, actually I love exactly these kind of responses! We all take ourselves way too seriously! With "Lords" I was talking about a thread a year or so ago, and of course, I ment all you guys who know what I was talking about and who care for these boards!
Oh, apple pie with vanilla ice-cream? Well, don't know if you would eat "my" version but I will try making one! ;)
|
It's an awful tiny teapot for such a big tempest, IMO.
QFT. I don't see what the big deal is. It doesn't seem to me that Paizo is stiffling debate, just keeping people from referring to other people as poo-poo heads, which (emotions running high or not) you think would be common sense.
The again, I read the forums over at FARK a couple times a day. The arguements here are kindergarten class compared the typcal thread there.
I hate to see people get their feelings hurt or mute the exchange of ideas. On the other hand, if someone's only response to Paizo lightly moderating the 4e is to take their toys and go home, I don't have alot of sympathy for them.
-Skeld
I really don't care if people jump to assumptions or misunderstandings of my posts or meaning. We as a society should not be so thin skinned that we have to engage in verbal gymnastics to avoid any possibility that something we say could remotely be construed as an insult.
That way leads madness.
I am not saying that you should perform verbal gymnastics to spare someone elses feelings. All I am saying is that it is safer on these boards, as well as lending itself to better discussion, to discuss the flaws of the product and not the view of the deisgner. The question I I was addressing in this thread refers to what is acceptable to post and that's what I answered.
X designer's product should be questioned PROFESSIONALLY. Do you know if everything that he writes appears in the product as he wrote it, or does it go through some measure of colaboration and/or editing before we see it? How can you put forth that he is a lousy designer when you haven't even see the version of the product he submitted? All we have is the product in front of us - why not debate that?
And I'm sure Mr. Frost is likewise a decent person (even if he is in marketing and he may have been forced to sell his decency when he got his degree ;-) ...Good thing I majored in English.
Ah, so just your first born child then :)
Out of curiousity, what precise aspect of English did you major in (classics, European literature, etc.)?
Cheers,
Colin
P.S. This probably qualifies as off-topic thread-crapping.....never mind. My apologies.
|
|
I hate to see people get their feelings hurt or mute the exchange of ideas. On the other hand, if someone's only response to Paizo lightly moderating the 4e is to take their toys and go home, I don't have alot of sympathy for them.
Hello! Welcome to the Paizo Ice Cream Shop. Due to complaints from the protesters picketing outside, we have reduced the selections available to vanilla or vanilla. You can get that in either a Small or Small cone. Nuts - no, no nuts, people are allergic to them. Cherries, we had complaints about the migrant workers that had to pick cherries for pennies a day so we stopped carrying them. Chocolate sauce? Oh no. Didn't you know that chocolate is farmed by indentured servants and child labor in third world countries? Too many complaints about that; who wants to be seen as supporting child slavery after all? Ok then... what will it be?
Seriously, read my post on the first page about why people are leaving. It has nothing to do with what you are implying here.
|
|
I really don't care if people jump to assumptions or misunderstandings of my posts or meaning. We as a society should not be so thin skinned that we have to engage in verbal gymnastics to avoid any possibility that something we say could remotely be construed as an insult.
That way leads madness.
I am not saying that you should perform verbal gymnastics to spare someone elses feelings. All I am saying is that it is safer on these boards, as well as lending itself to better discussion, to discuss the flaws of the product and not the view of the deisgner. The question I I was addressing in this thread refers to what is acceptable to post and that's what I answered.
X designer's product should be questioned PROFESSIONALLY. Do you know if everything that he writes appears in the product as he wrote it, or does it go through some measure of colaboration and/or editing before we see it? How can you put forth that he is a lousy designer when you haven't even see the version of the product he submitted? All we have is the product in front of us - why not debate that?
That's a very good point about the editing. But, as I stated above, I stand by the proposition that an author has made themselves a public figure open to criticism. When i call an author lousy, it is a reflection of their professional work and not their personal traits. It is also a reflection of my tastes and opinions on their work. This has been a component of literary criticism since the days or yore (that's really a long time ago) and should not be discarded because we have become so thin skinned as a society.
I will tell you that I tend to only criticize a designer when several of their works or ideas really turn me off. If its just one book, i'm likely to limit my criticism to the work.
Please understand that i can see your points, I just stand on the other side of the politeness divide. I guess you can call me a curmudgeon.
I don´t understand the reasoning of disenchanter and others to leave the boards because of the moderation taking place.
The flames on the 4e boards were burning brightly for months. Lisa posted and asked for a more civilized behaviour. The flaming continued nevertheless. Now, one post and the ensuing discussion was the last straw (as Joshua Frost put it himself) to introduce more moderation than before to a small part of the boards.
Now some folks fear that this is only the beginning of a downhill spiral of censorship on paizo boards? And they don´t want to be controlled by some folks playing censor? And their answer is to quit?
Sure as hell. If I anticipate folks might tell me what I should do and what I should not, without having the authority to do so, running away from them helps a lot. And I think that the folks at paizo are decent enough not to introduce heavy-handed censorship and deleting of posts and accounts - if they were of that mind, would they have waited for two months from Lisas post until introducing this level of moderation? I think paizo waited and hoped it wold get better and resorted to heavier moderation (mind you, on a small part of the boards) when it would not get any better. And they only introduced the level of control absolutely necessary from their point of view.
I can understand getting angry at moderation. But I direct my anger at those folks that let the whole situation detoriorate so far as to make this approach necessary from paizos point of view - these are their boards, after all, and the contents reflect on the company. (Not to mention personal issues, like friendship with designers who were insulted here). As has been stated by various folks from paizo, the moderation will target personal attacks and insults only. I have no reason to believe otherwise, and the old policy of "innocent until found guilty" should remain in force here as well. Don´t judge someone for what they might or might not do - to do otherwise is prejudice.
Leaving right now is giving away the chance to improve the boards later.
As I said, I don´t understand that reasoning. Perhaps my view of the whole thing is myopic, and someone is able to enlighten me. But from my point of view, this is as much overreaction as the poster who said he won´t buy anything from paizo for their messageboards (and please don´t repeat the theory of this post being fake/trolling/made by WotC folks - it might be, but is it the content and the consequences of this post that matter, not the intent or identity of the poster).
Stefan
I guess you can call me a curmudgeon.
I would do no such thing, as I agree with some of your points as well. It is perfectly acceptable to deign a designer unfit due to poorly designed products (before or after editting), it just seems safer in the current climate of the boards to stick to criticism of the product and not the person. Just trying to be helpful to those who were interested in finding out what was acceptable to post and what was not.
|
|
I keep getting sucked back in to defend my position. My post did not make any personal insults. It may have been snarky. It was definitely anti-4E. I do not believe it was worthy of being deleted, especially since it didn't violate the new Paizo "policy" for lack of a better term. If something as innocuous as my post was deleted, I can only see things getting worse. It was not eaten or delayed. It was visible, and then "disappeared". What's the point of posting if it's just going to get deleted? How can you "fight back" or "stick around" when your ability to do such things is negated? I feel that my only option is to leave these boards in protest of overly zealous moderation. The sad thing is that as bad as the WotC and ENWorld boards are, even they most likely wouldn't have deleted my post. I would most defintely have gotten dogpiled by 4E fanboys, but it porbably wouldn't have been deleted. I think it's fair to say the yesterday's "clean-up" was worse than those other two boards with a deserved reputation for heavy-handed moderation.
Senior Software Developer
|
Actually it turns out that the post in question was indeed suppressed. See my post here for more info.
I keep getting sucked back in to defend my position. My post did not make any personal insults. It may have been snarky. It was definitely anti-4E. I do not believe it was worthy of being deleted, especially since it didn't violate the new Paizo "policy" for lack of a better term. If something as innocuous as my post was deleted, I can only see things getting worse. It was not eaten or delayed. It was visible, and then "disappeared". What's the point of posting if it's just going to get deleted? How can you "fight back" or "stick around" when your ability to do such things is negated? I feel that my only option is to leave these boards in protest of overly zealous moderation.
I've been somewhat quiet today, but I have been around.
I don't begrudge you your anger Cory.
Even so, to reply to your last couple of sentences, you seem to have not realized that posting here is a priviledge. The First Amendment doesn't apply (as Sebastian pointed out, Paizo is not the government).
You're a guest in Paizo's home. Paizo became concerned that other guests were being insulted. They became concerned that the neighbors (WOTC) were being insulted. Lisa came and said that Paizo wouldn't contradict your right to be irritated with the 'neighbors', but she asked that you not throw open Paizo's living room windows and shout dirty names into the next yard. It makes her and her family look bad, even if you are a guest here.
Because it's rude and disrespectful.
Now, I don't know if you specifically did that. I'm to understand from another thread that Gary Teter admitted yours was borderline and that if he was going to err, it would be on the side of civility.
If you can't forgive Paizo, then so be it. We'll be here if you change your mind.
But I think whatever wrongful censorship you feel has been done to you, it's forgiveable. Today is new day. A new chance to start again, and we can all be a little wiser for it.
(Even me)
But if you just want to chuck whatever good times you ever had around here, and whatever fellowship you once might have felt..
Gee.. sorry. Hope you have a good life. :-/
I agree with Disenchanter 100% and will be following suit.
Na shledanou.
-Frank
I must just not be seeing it. I see some sparring between about ten people, and it just strikes me as a rhetorical go 'round. I don't see anyone losing their heads.
I still like the boards. What can I say? There is such intelligence, humor and familiarity to be found here.
|
|
Seriously, read my post on the first page about why people are leaving. It has nothing to do with what you are implying here.
I read your post from the first page. I didn't find your arguement there (or the above ice cream shop analogy) very compelling.
I know you're saying that people leaving of taking a break from the boards isn't sour grapes, and maybe it isn't, but that's sure what it sounds like to me.
-Skeld
I must just not be seeing it. I see some sparring between about ten people, and it just strikes me as a rhetorical go 'round. I don't see anyone losing their heads.
I still like the boards. What can I say? There is such intelligence, humor and familiarity to be found here.
Party pooper.
;)
Damn you Postmonster! sniff I want a border! sniff
Well, get out that credit card, man! C'mon!
Is all criticism of WOTC now prohibited?Come on, seriously?
You can critique all you want. We've stated this at least six times on these boards since yesterday. Matter of fact, you're critiquing Paizo right now and I'm not moderating you.
You can say, "I think Company A has done a terrible job with their PR re: the new edition."
You can say, "I think Company B shouldn't moderate at all."
You can say, "I disagree with Company C's decision to make their own game."
Those are criticisms and you don't see those listed in the rules for this particular forum.
You can not say, "I think the Company A designers are [expletive]."
You can not say, "Company B's a bunch of [expletives] for moderating their boards."
You can not say, "The Company C guys are idiots for not supporting 4E."
I can't understand how the rules of this sub-forum are at all confusing.
The last three are opinions. Very valid opinions, I might add. I believe as long as the person can express in great detail why they feel that way, I don't think it's wrong. I think there's a fine line between critiques and opinions. But a better way to implement a better forum would be to specify that ONLY non-insultive criticisms are allowed in discussions and no opinions are allowed. But, as I said earlier, there's a fine line between the two that is, unfortunately, going to get crossed many times.
|
The last three are opinions. Very valid opinions, I might add. I believe as long as the person can express in great detail why they feel that way, I don't think it's wrong. I think there's a fine line between critiques and opinions. But a better way to implement a better forum would be to specify that ONLY non-insultive criticisms are allowed in discussions and no opinions are allowed. But, as I said earlier, there's a fine line between the two that is, unfortunately, going to get crossed many times.You can say, "I think Company A has done a terrible job with their PR re: the new edition."
You can say, "I think Company B shouldn't moderate at all."
You can say, "I disagree with Company C's decision to make their own game."
Those are criticisms and you don't see those listed in the rules for this particular forum.
You can not say, "I think the Company A designers are [expletive]."
You can not say, "Company B's a bunch of [expletives] for moderating their boards."
You can not say, "The Company C guys are idiots for not supporting 4E."
I can't understand how the rules of this sub-forum are at all confusing.
Technically, they're all opinions. The difference, the important difference, is that the first three are directed at an action or product, where as the last three are directed at a person. You want to critique how someone's doing their job, go for it. But don't critique the person.
For instance, I can say "I think Mr. Rogers is a lousy writer, look at the crap job he did on Welcome To My Neighborhood." I'm critiquing his writing, with examples. But I can't say "I think Mr. Rogers sucks, look at the crap job he did on Meet My Neighbors." That's directed at Mr Rogers himself, which is uncool, and not allowed.
The key thing is this: are you going after the person, or his/her actions and products. If you're going after the person then its not allowed, and shouldn't be. Sometimes its a fine line, I'll agree. But if you remove all examples and extraneous text, it'll usually become fairly obvious which side of the line it falls on.
And I applaud the Paizo staff for taking this obviously unpopular, and just as obviously needed, step. I'm one of those that's still undecided about 4E. I used to read the 4E threads so I could become better informed and make a good decision. But over the last couple months, I'd been skipping over them because of all the flaming going on, from both sides.
I don't want to see this board turn into another heavily-moderated one, but I don't think that's going to happen. Remember, this is Paizo we're talking about. The people who are so invested in this game and their customers that they answer message board requests at 1am on a Saturday night. The same people that, during the Green Ronin fiasco, took a lot of flack from the customers and remained calm and civil at all times. And actually *listened* to us, and changed how they fill orders for limited-supply items based on our complaints. So I say to give them the benefit of the doubt and give it a few weeks. All they've asked is that we refrain from directly insults, whether against a company or a person. I think that's the least we can do.
But that's just my opinion, take it as you will. :)
It has started. And wizards has already won.
I am uninterested in moderating these boards as part of my already incredibly lengthy list of job duties. (Sales AND Marketing. For the whole company. You do the math.)
I'm moderating these boards because we (Paizo) have had enough with these boards being the one festering pit of ugly on our entire messageboards.
In a week, this will have all blown over and the 4E threads will be a nicer place to hang out. I don't for one second imagine that everyone will agree or get along, but I certainly expect everyone to resist the lazy temptation to lash out and textually (verbally?) abuse someone with whom they disagree.
It's not the spirit of our boards. If you (the royal you, not any particular you) felt that the spirit of the Paizo boards was a place where attacks and abject, pointless rudeness were the norm and acceptable, then you were wrong. We want this to be a nice place. We want you to want this to be a nice place. I'm sure it'll be a nice place again and Gary and I can back slowly away from the 4e threads.
So if you're worried that we're going to moderate forever, allow me to assure you that we're not. I simply don't have the time.
But we'll always be watching.
*insert creepy laughter here*
It has started. And wizards has already won.
How so? (Really curious about what you mean!)
Cheers! :)
Out of curiousity, what precise aspect of English did you major in (classics, European literature, etc.)?
To answer your question, I began as a creative writing major and ended as a general english lit major with a pre-professional emphasis in publishing. I use my skills learned in college to create marketing that I feel stands out from the rest of the marketing out there (since I'm not grounded in current marketing theory). And I do a little freelance on the side. :-)
Hey now, I thought we wanted these boards kept clean! No one here needs to know about the sordid ways in which you earn extra cash. Eww!
You'll know all about my sordid ways when you meet my swarm in Pathfinder #9.
MUHAH.
MUHAHAH.
MUHAHAHAHAHAH.
There's nothing more horrific than a Sales & Marketing Swarm...
*shudders...*
But we'll always be watching.
*insert creepy laughter here*
AHEM.
AHEM.But we'll always be watching.
*insert creepy laughter here*
Yoink!
If you (the royal you, not any particular you) felt that the spirit of the Paizo boards was a place where attacks and abject, pointless rudeness were the norm and acceptable, then you were wrong.
But...
But.... .... .....
What will you do with Sebastian?
;-)
Cheers,
Colin
P.S. Thanks for answering my question; consider my curiousity slaked (sounds pretty cool actually; I took an upper level creative writing course when I first started my Zoology degree, just to cover my academic bases.....it was one helluva lot more fun than memorizing invertebrate taxonomy, that's for bloody sure! :) :)
|
In a week, this will have all blown over and the 4E threads will be a nicer place to hang out. I don't for one second imagine that everyone will agree or get along, but I certainly expect everyone to resist the lazy temptation to lash out and textually (verbally?) abuse someone with whom they disagree.
It's not the spirit of our boards. If you (the royal you, not any particular you) felt that the spirit of the Paizo boards was a place where attacks and abject, pointless rudeness were the norm and acceptable, then you were wrong. We want this to be a nice place. We want you to want this to be a nice place. I'm sure it'll be a nice place again and Gary and I can back slowly away from the 4e threads.
So let me commend you on this statement and your actions. I started the WOOT thread. I saw Cory's post before it was deleted and he was being a troll on purpose to poke buttons. I appreciated your team stepping in and deleting the post.
I wish more moderators would step in like that more often. You are fully justified in modifying your boards to keep the quality at the level you desire. And if that means less twits and more constructive, interesting discussions then more power to you.
And here's the thing, if Cory wants to create a "I'm mad as hell at WotC and I'm not going to take it anymore" thread - he should! I'm not going to hop on it and go "Woot!"